THE WAIKATO ELECTION.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 2341, 12 July 1887, Page 3

THE WAIKATO ELECTION.

TO THK KIlliOR. Hm,—Most of us will remember tho InD contest for Waikato between Mr J. B. Whyte and Mr J. P. Campbell in 1870. That was a contest which, though a very sharp one, was fought out as between gentlemen, neither endeavouring tn exalt himself by depreciating bis rival, or resorting to underhand electioneering tricks. It was worthy of tho two men engaged in it. Such cannot, however, bo tho case in the present contest if Mr linsscll continues to use bis “ valuable journal ” as at present, inserting flattering references to himself, and everything, attacks direct and inferential, by which ho can reflect discredit on Mr Whyte. Hamilton correspondent’s letter of the Ist instant, for instance, is palpably in Mr Russell’s own phraseology, and not tho writing of a Hamilton man. Nay, there are some here who say tho arguments and the very words they are clothed in were used by that gentlemen to them upon the street, days before ever the letter was printed. Only a day or two ago we are favoured with a list of those members of the present House who would bo missed if not returned to the new one, and the name of Mr Whyte is in this list conspicuous by its absence. True, it is an extract from tbe Wellington Post, but good taste would have nrevented its re-publication in Mr Russell’s own paper, more especially as that gentlemen is too well posted not to have known that the Post, when even supporting tho Government, spoke in most flattering terms of Mr Whyte’s speeches, as did also tho Lyttelton Times. Mr Whyte certainly has not the volubility and verbosity of Mr Russell, but a two hours and twenty minutes speech, especially when only the rechauffe of the speeches of others, is just tho sort of thing that clears the House, while tho short and pithy speeches of such a man as Mr Whyte fill it, and are quoted even now as gems of Parliamentary Debate, especially those of 1885 and 1881! hi tha no-confidence debates. Again, Mr Russell is always trying to make out that Mr Whyte is opposed tn railway reform, because he will not swallow Nli Valles proposal to cany passengers 50 miles for -id. Yet. Mr linsscll, who did swallow this at onetime, has been unable to retain it nn his stomach, vide tho Hamilton speech recently delivered. No doubt Mr Whyte is as anxious for railway reform as Mr Russell, but ho is at hast ingenuous. Ho does not profess to be a “pronounced supporter” of Valles system, and at the same time raise an objection to it in detail which would leave him quite at liberty, to go hack upon it altogather when the question came to a vote in the House. As one who is not prepared to say even yet that he will not vote for Mr Russell I would earnestly advise him to drop these personalities and electioneering littlenesses as beneath him. Mr Whyte may be quite content to be classed with the Trimbles, Pultons, Connollys, Thomsons, fishers, Millars, Hislops, and Montoalhs, who are also omitted from the 19 members referred to by tho Post, of whom by the bye only three belong to tho Government party, and as to tho railway reform question both candidates stand nn much the same platform at present.—Yours truly, jiI.KCTOIt. Cambridge, July 9th ISS7.